In deciding whether or not the trial court was in error in refusing to give to the jury at appellant’s request the general affirmative charge to find in his favor, we will not — cannot—hold such action erroneous if there was a “scintilla of evidence” offered, tending to support the allegations of the indictment. Norwood Hospital v. Brown, 219 Ala. 445, 122 So. 411. Manifestly, obviously, and without serious question, there was such “scintilla”' in this case; hence the affirmative charge, etc., referred to, was properly refused.
We are not required to say whether or not the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. Orman et al. v. Scharnagel, 210 Ala. 381, 98 So. 123.
The big question in the case, as shown by the record, etc., was as to whether or not, under the testimony; appellant could be lawfully punished as for the charge contained in the indictment. As shown, we are unable to state that he could not be.
We have carefully examined all other questions apparent — both'as to rulings on the táking of testimony and as to the refusal of written, etc., charges. It would seem that discussion was profitless. Suffice to say that we discover nowhere prejudicial error, and the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Affirmed.